Definitely.
I never came over it that Grass is a citizen of my beloved city of Lübeck - the only city on earth were I really would love to live (and home of another nobel prize winner in literature: Thomas Mann - who also is beyond Grass' reach, I don't read Mann, too, but at least he was a much smarter thinker than Grass).

Lübeck should be turned into a Grass-free zone :lol:

Damn you Skybird!! My boss left early today thankfully. :rotfl:

Immigrants hold peace march in Paris
 

This probably would've worked IF they had done this to begin with. Right now it's abit late for that since people would be up in arms over a politician rearding these people for ill behavior.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061025/...urban_violence

When Americans witnessed numerous so-called moderate Muslims make speeches to defend the benign nature of “The Religion of Peace,” after 9-11, for instance, many of these speakers were knowingly misrepresenting the true nature of Islam. Many have been documented speaking in far more aggressive terms in private meetings with other Muslims. These Muslims, posing as “moderates” justified their misrepresentations of Islam because in their minds, they were protecting Islam and thus American Muslims from “harm.” It was “damage control” in its truest form.

It was rumored that Shaaban was gathering an army to wage war on Mohammed. Mohammed retaliated by ordering Abdullah Ibn Anis to kill Shaaban. The would-be killer asked the prophet's permission to lie. Mohammed agreed and then ordered the killer to lie by stating that he was a member of the Khazaa clan. When Shaaban saw Abdullah coming, he asked him, "From what tribe are you?" Abdullah answered, "From Khazaa." He then added, "I have heard that you are gathering an army to fight Mohammed and I came to join you." Abdullah started walking with Shaaban telling him how Mohammed came to them with the heretical teachings of Islam, and complained how Mohammed badmouthed the Arab patriarchs and ruined the Arab's hopes. They continued in conversation until they arrived at Shaaban's tent. Shaaban's companions departed and Shaaban invited Abdullah to come inside and rest. Abdullah sat there until the atmosphere was quiet and he sensed that everyone was asleep. Abdullah severed Shaaban's head and carried it to Mohammed as a trophy. When Mohammed sighted Abdullah, he jubilantly shouted, "Your face has been triumphant (Aflaha al- wajho)." Abdullah returned the greeting by saying, "It is your face, Apostle of Allah, who has been triumphant. (Aflaha wajhoka, ye rasoul Allah)."


So we see that lying is permissible for any number of reasons. As long as the end goal is to further the cause of Muhammad or Islam, it is permissible and overrides the initial prohibition against lying. In this case it was permissible in order to achieve the end goal of an assassination of someone whom Muhammad wanted dead. Unfortunately, because Islam holds up Muhammad as the supreme example of behavior for all Muslims, this same attitude is carried on by many of Muhammad’s followers today.

Flowing on down the spectrum, there is the imperative for Islam to take over local and eventually national governments. This is the point, unfortunately where the true face, the violent face of Islam is often revealed and, where jihad usually begins to get bloody. This reality is seen throughout the World today. So, while many people in the West think of jihad as simply fighting against non-Muslim governments and nations etc., the concept in Islam actually includes all aspects of life. So, in the Muslim mind, even the struggle to convert non-Muslims to Islam is part of jihad. Evangelism in Islam is more than just “sharing the good news,” it is war. With this in mind, it is vital that we note Muhammad’s famous saying that, “War is deception.”

Tell the truth, you all want the gas chambers back don't you? :stare:

Dont be mad on us, we know what your thinking.:smug:

No but perhaps these guys do.

How dare you accuse people here of Nazi barbarity! :down: Another case of blame the victim - pathetic! :down:

Back on topic: Peace march indeed! :nope:
It's 5 years after 9/11. Here's the latest survey.

Joea, keep pretending there's no pattern here.

Thanks for your theology lesson Rockstar on my religion. Fortunately I don't take my ideas from you and Osama bin Laden and Co.

But heck, keep on ranting that all we Muslims are liers and that there is some great big conspiracy that we are all going to take over the world, yada yada yada. Yawn. :roll:

How any of what you say has to do with 20,000 people conducting a peaceful march in Paris I don't know. Thread hijacking perhaps.

Edit: Avon Lady to reply with long post and lots of links as sure as is death and taxes.

Outrage as Muslim cleric likens women to 'uncovered meat'
 

A Muslim cleric's claim that women who do not wear the veil are like 'uncovered meat' who attract sexual predators sparked outrage around Australia yesterday.

Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali, the nation's most senior Muslim cleric, compared immodestly-dressed women who do not wear the Islamic headdress with meat that is left uncovered in the street and is then eaten by cats.

In a Ramadam sermon in a Sydney mosque, Sheik al-Hilali suggested that a group of Muslim men recently jailed for many years for gang rapes were not entirely to blame.
(These women were all white and non muslim)

Addressing 500 worshippers on the topic of adultery, Sheik al-Hilali added: "If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it..whose fault is it - the cats or the uncovered meat?

"The uncovered meat is the problem."

He went on: "If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab (veil), no problem would have occurred."
Women, he said, were 'weapons' used by Satan to control men.


What a Wa*k*r.......



http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...37-601,00.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,20645635-2,00.html

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/...749218913.html

There are no lack of Islam authoratative sources. Major example:

"Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible."
- Imam Al-Ghazali, as quoted by Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, The Reliance of the Traveller, translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, (Amana publications, 1997), section r8.2, p 745

Do you wish to debate the popularity, reverance and acceptance of al-Misri's book in the Islamic world? Or that of Imam Al-Ghazali? Or that of the book Reliance of the Traveller?

I fully believe you say what you mean and mean what you say. But who is your authority? Give us a hint. Show us why Rockstar is wrong, based on the very religious sources you believe in.
Conspiracy? This is what Islamic religious leaders all over the world keep on saying and they are no longer shy about boasting it among English speaking publics. So forgive us for believing your co-religionists.
No but the world is being hijacked, bit by bit.
Live long and prosper! ;)

Did you ever realize that Mr. Spock's blessing is the maximal antidote to death and taxes? Think about it.

The sexual predators are the least of our problems. It's all these pesky flies that are driving us women batty! :doh:

Superman was alot safer fearing kryptonite instead of the less rare Playboy magazine.

:x The problems isnt the uncovered meat, (:huh: MEAT? how rude...Skin please)
the problem is the muslim getting too much with their noses in our lives. they need to back off!

and now to change the thing...I find it very insulting towards me when an Muslim women is talking to me with her face covered!

and why in school arent we allowed to cover our heads with an baseball cap and the muslim are allowed to wear those towels covering their faces..or whatever they call that.

Ladies, if you get tired of being treated like that, come over to my place in America. I'll give you respect and make love to you twice a day. Three times on Saturday if you can pull me away from playing SH3. :88)

I'll even help you do the dishes. :D

The link between supressive morality plus supressed sexuality, and totalitarianism and male brutality - almost proverbial, in my eyes.

That sucker should do some reading: wilhelm Reich "The mass psychology of fascism". He thouroughly analyses - by example of Marxism and Fascism - how fascism, or in a wider understanding: totalitarianism - can be understood as the logical fallout of a hardened, repressice character structure that for reason of whatever failed or flawed morality refuses to accept oneself's sexual drives and desires.

The relation of Islam to sexuality I always have seen as deeply sick and repressive. Writes Istiaq Ahmed, professor for politcal science in Stockholm, (I re-quote him by a German book): " 'Segregation' is something all Muslims nations have in common. Wehre males and females are kept seperate from each other, sex does not disappear from their lives, but it rises into their heads - and stays there. If God really wanted sex-less beings inhabiting Earth, he would have send angels down to earth and would have kept human beings in heaven."

The same professor also refers to that Google-analysis of what nations produce the most clicks on porno-websites, I referred to it in a joke thread some weeks ago. I now have the complete top ten:

1. Pakistan
2. Egypt
3. Vietnam
4. Iran
5. India
6. Marocco
7. Indonesia
8. turkey
9. Saudi-Arabia
10. Poland

He questions the order, though, saying that internet-access in Saudi-Arabia and Iran are much more restricted than in Pakistan and Egypt. If people in these four countries would have similiar access to the internet, Iran and Saudi-Arabaia would lead that list before Pakistan and Egypt.

He explains further about the backwardness of Islamic societies and their supressive morales: " If we would modernize our understanding of sexuality and make it more humane, we would be able to use our energies in a productive and creative way. By not doing so, we foster frustration, which unloads in extremism and terrorism. Yes, I believe there is a social-sexual fundament for the current rise of extremism and terrorism and the muslim world."

I believe that, too. but I am more pessimistic about the possebilities of "modernizing" Islam's sexual morale. It still sees females as inhuman creatures not really being humans, but being linked to satan and thus being an expression of satan'S energy - which (male) man must supress by controlling females so that their energy cannot "explode". Enforced sex, rape, no rights for females, and totalitarian control of intersexual relations on a communal level are just expression and logical consequence of a mind that preaches and says prayers during sex that should ban satan and that understand sex as controlling women's satanic energy and save society from it. That's why this braindead cleric is seeing the male opressors as the victims of female charms. the victim - women - are declared the attacker, the danger, the threat. In it's own queer way, it is logical. No wonder then that I had to read repeatedly in books that throughout history it has been ruled that sex with a woman is even more sinful than having sex with animals, or even dead human bodies. Nothing can illustrate the deeply rooting fear and totally perverted relation Islam's view of man and life has when it comes to sexuality and the relation between both sexes.

A related essay:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/...443678,00.html